This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the elfutils project.
Re: [PATCHv2 1/2] Add is_executable to Dwfl_Module.
- From: Mark Wielaard <mjw at redhat dot com>
- To: elfutils-devel at lists dot fedorahosted dot org
- Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 22:33:50 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/2] Add is_executable to Dwfl_Module.
On Wed, 2014-09-10 at 21:22 +0200, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Sep 2014 20:56:48 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > I don't think it is very helpful or productive to refuse to have a
> > technical opinion on a fair question about a code change you are
> > proposing.
> By ": 1" I give a promise to compiler I will use only its single bit.
> Smart compiler with -fwhole-program, -flto etc. could make it 'unsigned char'
> when the struct is not externally visible and therefore ABI-constrained.
Yeah, I understood why you proposed it for the new field. It was just
pointed out that it was an inconsistent choice with respect to the
> 2014-09-10 Jan Kratochvil <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> * dwfl_build_id_find_elf.c (dwfl_build_id_find_elf): Use IS_EXECUTABLE.
> * dwfl_segment_report_module.c (dwfl_segment_report_module): Set
> * libdwflP.h (struct Dwfl_Module): New field is_executable.
I like this cleanup (modulo the already existing e32/e64 confusion in the code).